Mohammed Ali v. The Inspector General Of Registration
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15-04-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
1. Mohammed Ali S/o.Jani Basha, No.600/1, Senji Road, Tindivanam-604 202 Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Inspector General of Registration No.100, Santhome High Road, Pattiapakkam, Chennai-600 028 2.The Sub Registrar, Mayilam Paandi Road, vaanur, Tindivanam-605 109 3.Fakrudhin S/o.Mohammed Hussain, Rahmath Nagar, Kottakuppam, Vaanoor Circle, Pin code-605 104 Respondent(s) PRAYER directing the respondents 1 to 2 to take action against the 3rd respondent based on the petitioners representation dated 18.11.2025 within the time frame fixed by this Honourable Court For Petitioner(s):
Mr.R.Dwarakesh For Respondent(s):
Mr.U.Baranidharan,SGP For R1 and R2
R3 - notice dispensed with
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to take action against the third respondent, based on the petitioner's representation dated 18.11.2025 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. According to the petitioner, without obtaining approval under the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971, the third respondent is selling plots, which are morefully disclosed in the representation of the petitioner dated 18.11.2025. According to the petitioner, the respondents 1 and 2 are also registering the documents pertaining to the unapproved plots, which is illegal. Since the representation of the petitioner dated 18.11.2025, requesting the respondents 1 and 2 not to register the documents pertaining to the unapproved plots belonging to the third respondent, has not been considered till date, this writ petition has been filed.
3. Mr. U. Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2. Since no adverse orders are passed against the third respondent, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with by this Court.
4. The petitioner has filed supporting documents along with this writ petition in support of his representation dated 18.11.2025. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the same.
5. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner's representation as stated supra is considered on merits and in accordance with law after hearing the objections of the third respondent as well as any other third party whom the second respondent deems it fit to enquire within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
6. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's representation.
7. For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the second respondent to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representation dated 18.11.2025, requesting the second respondent not to register any document pertaining to the plots, morefully disclosed in the representation dated 18.11.2025, as according to the petitioner, they are the unapproved plots, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after hearing the objections of the third respondent as well as any other third party whom the second respondent deems it fit to enquire.
8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. 15-04-2026 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes ab
To 1.The Inspector General of Registration No.100, Santhome High Road, Pattiapakkam, Chennai-600 028 2.The Sub Registrar, Mayilam Paandi Road, vaanur, Tindivanam-605 109
ABDUL QUDDHOSE J.
ab 15-04-2026